Sewa Ram & Ors. vs State & Anr.
2012 Latest Caselaw 1801 Del

$~12

*       IN THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW  DELHI



+ 		CRL.M.C. No.226/2012 

%		Judgment delivered on:  15th March, 2012





	SEWA RAM & ORS.                          ..... Petitioner

				Through: Mr.Amit Balyan & Ms. Nisha Neel, 				Advs.  

			versus



	STATE & ANR.                         		..... Respondents

				Through: Mr. Navin Sharma, APP for State.



CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

			

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

1. Vide instant petition, the petitioners have sought to quash the complaint case No. 37/01 filed under Sections 323/506(II)/34 IPC against the petitioners, and the proceedings emanating therefrom, which is pending before the learned trial court at Rohini Courts, Delhi.

2. It is further submitted that vide order dated 20.03.2001, summons were issued against all the petitioners. Thereafter, vide compromise deed dated 9.9.2011, respondent No.2/complainant has settled all the issues qua all the petitioners, therefore, he is no more interested to pursue the case. In the facts and circumstances, the instant petition may be allowed.

3. Respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court. He submits that he has already settled all the issues qua all the petitioners, therefore, he is no more interested to pursue the case further against them. He has no objection if the instant petition is allowed.

4. Learned APP for the State submits that since it is a compliant case pending between the parties, therefore, he has no objection in the light of compromise arrived at with the petitioners.

5. In the facts and circumstances, keeping in view the compromise deed dated 9.9.2011 and the statement of the respondent who is no more interested to pursue the complaint mentioned above, pending before the trial court, and in the interest of justice, since the petitioners and respondent No.2 are from the same village and locality, therefore, the complaint case No. 37/2001 pending before the trial court having jurisdiction of PS Samaipur Badli, with the proceedings emanating therefrom, is hereby quashed.

6. Crl. MC. 226/2012 is allowed and disposed of.

7. No order as to costs.

SURESH KAIT, J

MARCH 15, 2012

'raj'